Why "I" Matters

There's a challenge I pose to myself regularly, though it's not really a challenge, it's a question: Why?

Why is this important?

Why is this relevant?

Why does this matter?

The more I work on this concept of self, of consciousness and of identity (I don't like to think of it purely as a conscious problem, as I think that the conscious problem leaves out some very important elements of identity), the more I challenge myself to prove that it is more than just a philosophical exercise.

I find that when I use this study I often cop-out, I discuss issues of self-awareness and control of the circumstances. These are my simple answers, my textbook solutions to a question that I really should challenge myself with, not simply answer for the sake of answering, as the entire notion of answering the question for the sake of answering the question really is self-defeating.

So, why? Why is a notion of self important?

It is important because it defines ethics. No study of ethics, no legal system can exist without a substantial definition, without a recognition of self, of "I."

When I read legal documents, I see a lot of the same jargon repeated regularly. There is "Party A" and "Party B." All of our ethical standards in the legal world are contingent on the notion of entities, and so for me to set ethical boundaries for myself, for me to create an ethos by which I should live, I must first define "I."

The ego, as Freud would have termed it, defines our nature and our interaction with the world around us. Freud tried to explain the nature of the ego, how it is inculcated with certain ideas, how it comes to be as it is, and I realize, the more I read about Freud, how completely he failed in certain respects, purely because he lacked many of the components that are now available to us, like an understanding of neurological physiology (something all modern conscious philosophers site regularly).

It's not my intention, as it was for Freud, to create an entire system of rehabilitation based on my conclusions. If the conclusions, in due course, allow for such a possibility, then I'll cross that bridge when I get there, but for now I'll leave that very much alone.

The principle reason I want to define what and who I am is to understand what behaviors, acts and events I am in control of, what I can (and should) be held responsible for, and find a way to live in accordance with that ethos. Maybe this is ambitious, but it seems that any sense of ethics must begin with the fundamentals, so that is where I intend to start.